The Effects of A Therapy Animal On College Student Stress and Aro

St.
Catherine University
University of St. Tomas
Master of Social Work Clinical Research Papers School of Social Work
5-2013
Te Efects of a Terapy Animal on College
Student Stress and Arousal
Michelle Bjick
St. Catherine University
Tis Clinical research paper is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Social Work at SOPHIA. It has been accepted for inclusion in
Master of Social Work Clinical Research Papers by an authorized administrator of SOPHIA. For more information, please contact ejasch@stkate.edu.
Recommended Citation
Bjick, Michelle, "Te Efects of a Terapy Animal on College Student Stress and Arousal" (2013). Master of Social Work Clinical
Research Papers. Paper 152.
htp://sophia.stkate.edu/msw_papers/152

The Effects of a Therapy Animal on College Student Stress and Arousal

Submitted by

Michelle Bjick, BA, LSW

May 2012

MSW Clinical Research Paper

Presented to the Faculty of the
School of Social Work
St. Catherine University & University of St. Thomas
St. Paul, Minnesota
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Master of Social Work

Committee Members:

Katharine Hill, Ph.D., MSW, LISW (Chair)
Patti Anderson, M.Ed., C.P.D.T.
Tanya Bailey, MSW, LICSW

The Clinical Research Project is a graduation requirement for MSW students at St.
Catherine University/University of St. Thomas School of Social Work in St. Paul,
Minnesota and is conducted within a nine-month time frame to demonstrate facility with
basic social work research methods. Students must independently conceptualize a
research problem, formulate a research design that is approved by a research committee
and the university Institutional Review Board, implement the project, and publicly
present their findings. This project is neither a Masters thesis nor a dissertation.

i
Abstract

Colleges are facing increasing levels of distressed students and need a wide variety of
tools to assist them. One such modality is animal-assisted interaction; an integrative
practice with minimal side effects. This study attempted to demonstrate that spending
time with animals will decrease a college students stress level. It was based on a 2004
study by Charnetski, Brennan and Riggers which studied the effect of a dog on college
students immune systems. This study consisted of four groups: the control group, a
group that experienced explicit observation of a therapy rabbit, a group that experienced
implicit observation of the therapy rabbit, and a group that stroked a stuffed rabbit. The
32 participants in this study were all female, primarily baccalaureate students between 18
20 years old, from a small, private, Midwestern university. Before and after the
experience, students indicated their stress and arousal level using the Stress Arousal
Checklist (MacKay, Cox, Burrows & Lazzerini, 1978). All four groups demonstrated a
statistically significant decrease in stress level after their experience. An interesting
pattern occurred in their arousal levels; the control groups arousal level decreased, the
stuffed rabbit group experienced no change, and both of the groups who were exposed to
the rabbit had an increase in their arousal level. The enthusiasm college students
demonstrate toward animals may mitigate some of the excuses students use for not
engaging in traditional mental health techniques. Incorporating registered therapy
animals for this work offers an effective way to assist students who are experiencing
stress.
ii

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my clinical research chair, Katharine Hill, for her support
throughout this research project. Her insight and feedback helped make this project
possible. I am particularly grateful for her wisdom in research methods and her ability to
help me share my findings in a clear, comprehensive way. Katharines availability, calm
demeanor and reassurance made this project enjoyable, as well as educational.
I would like to thank my committee members, Tanya Bailey and Patti Anderson,
for sharing their time and subject matter expertise. They offered the perfect blend of
encouragement, while also challenging me on this project. Both of these women are
pioneers in this field and shared invaluable insights to this process. In addition, I am
grateful to Patti for introducing me to the world of animal assisted interactions with a
rabbit.
I would also like to thank my family for their love, support and encouragement,
without which my education would not be possible.

iii
Table of Contents

Abstract ............................................................................................................................... i
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ ii
Table of Contents .............................................................................................................. iii
List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... v
List of Figures ................................................................................................................... vi
Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 2
Literature Review............................................................................................................... 4
History.................................................................................................................... 4
Definition of Terms................................................................................................ 6
Risks ....................................................................................................................... 8
Social Benefits ..................................................................................................... 10
Physical Health Benefits ...................................................................................... 11
Mental Health Benefits ........................................................................................ 11
Animals in a College Setting ............................................................................... 13

Conceptual Framework .................................................................................................... 15
Attachment Theory .............................................................................................. 15
Social Support Theory ......................................................................................... 16
Biophilia Hypothesis ............................................................................................ 16

Methods............................................................................................................................ 18
Subject.................................................................................................................. 18
Setting .................................................................................................................. 19
Procedure ............................................................................................................. 20
Data Collection .................................................................................................... 21
Analysis Technique .............................................................................................. 22
Limits of Research ............................................................................................... 23

Findings............................................................................................................................ 23
Descriptive Statistics ............................................................................................ 23
Student Stress Pre-test and Post-test Information .................................... 26
Student Arousal Pre-test and Post-test Information ................................. 28
Student Follow-up Stress and Arousal Information................................. 30

Inferential Statistics ............................................................................................. 32
Paired T-test of Pre- and Post-Test Scores for all Participants ................ 33
Correlation between PAS and Stress and Arousal Post-test Change ....... 36
iv
Independent Samples T-tests Comparing Stress and Arousal
Changes between Two Different Groups .......................................... 37
Paired Samples T-test Comparing Stress and Arousal Post-test
and Follow-up Scores ....................................................................... 38
Paired T-test Post and Follow-up Scores for Stress and Arousal
by Group .......................................................................................... 39

Discussion ........................................................................................................................ 41
Limitations of this Study ...................................................................................... 43
Implications for Social Work Research ............................................................... 44
Implications for Social Work Practice ................................................................. 47

Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 48
References ........................................................................................................................ 50
Appendix A. Consent Form ............................................................................................. 56
Appendix B. Pre-test Questionnaire ................................................................................ 59
Appendix C. Post-test/Follow-up Questionnaire ............................................................. 62
Appendix D. Recruitment Notice Materials .................................................................... 63
v
List of Tables
Table 1. Participant Year in College ................................................................................ 23
Table 2. Age Range of Participants ................................................................................. 24
Table 3. Race of Participants ........................................................................................... 24
Table 4. Student Pet Attitude Scale ................................................................................. 25
Table 5. Student Stress Pre-test and Post-test Scores ...................................................... 27
Table 6. Student Arousal Pre-test and Post-test Scores ................................................... 28
Table 7. Student Stress Follow-up Scores ....................................................................... 30
Table 8. Student Arousal Follow-up Scores .................................................................... 31
Table 9. Statistics of All Student Stress & Arousal Pre-test and Post-test Scores........... 33
Table 10. T-test of All Student Stress & Arousal Pre-test and Post-test Scores .............. 33
Table 11. Student Stress and Arousal Change by Group ................................................. 35
Table 12. Descriptive Statistics ........................................................................................ 36
Table 13. Correlations between Pet Attitude and Stress Change ..................................... 36
Table 14. Correlations between Pet Attitude and Arousal Change ................................. 36
Table 15. Statistics of All Student Stress and Arousal Post-test...................................... 39
and Follow-up Scores
Table 16. T-test of Student Stress and Arousal Post-test Scores and Follow-up ............. 39
Table 17. Statistics of Student Stress Post-test and Follow-up Scores ............................ 40
for Group 1 & 2
Table 18. T-test of Student Stress Post-test and Follow-up Scores ................................. 40
for Group 1 & 2
vi
List of Figures
Figure 1. Student Pet Attitude Scale ................................................................................ 26
Figure 2. Student Stress Pre-test ...................................................................................... 27
Figure 3. Student Stress Post-test .................................................................................... 28
Figure 4. Student Arousal Pre-test ................................................................................... 29
Figure 5. Student Arousal Post-test ................................................................................. 30
Figure 6. Student Stress Follow-up .................................................................................. 31
Figure 7. Student Arousal Follow-up .............................................................................. 32
Figure 8. Student Stress and Arousal Change by Group ................................................. 35

The Effect of a Therapy Animal on College Student Stress and Arousal 2

Introduction
College is a stressful time for many students. While adjusting to new social and
educational environments, students need to perform well academically, carefully manage
their time and finances, and begin creating a framework for their future (Misra &
Castillo, 2004). Currently nearly 20 million Americans attend college (Chronicle of
Higher Education, 2012). Many of these students are struggling. While in the midst of
transitions, and facing an array of academic, financial and social challenges, students are
at an increased risk of mental illness. According to the annual UCLA survey of the
nations college freshman, students reported the lowest emotional health since the survey
first measured this in 1985, an 11.7 percent drop (Hurtado, 2010). According to the
National Institute of Mental Health, 18.1% of the U.S. adult population have anxiety
disorders in any given year, with almost three fourths of those individuals experiencing
their first anxiety episode before the age of 21.5; the traditional age for college students
(Kessler, Chiu, Demler & Walters, 2005).
Even emotionally savvy students will face increased stress as they find
themselves away from their lifelong support systems. The current generation of college
students has been raised in a culture of overly-involved parents and a highly structured
childhood full of activities and programs, making the transition to autonomy and freedom
even more challenging than for previous generations (Bland, Melton, Welle & Bigham,
2012). This stress can be compounded as college students are vulnerable to stress carry-
over, a condition where stress experienced in one area of their life, whether at home, in a
class, at work, or with a roommate, can increase the stress in other areas (Pederson,
2012). The stress of college students has major implications on health care costs.

According to the latest research in the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, health costs for
treating anxiety alone are more than $42 billion dollars a year (Greenberg, Sisitsky,
Kessler, Finkelstein, Berndt, Davidson, Ballenge & Fyer, 1999). Currently, colleges are
facing increasing levels of distressed students and will need to have a wide variety of
tools to assist them.
One such modality is animal-assisted interaction; a low-cost, low-risk, integrative
practice with minimal side effects. The relationship between human beings and animals
has existed almost since the beginning of recorded time. The practical advantages of co-
existing with animals have long centered on animals as a source of food or labor, with
companionship being simply a bonus. It is relatively recent that the intrinsic benefits of
animal companionship have surfaced and begun to be explored. Contemporary research
has documented the holistic effect animals have on human beings (Becker, 2002;
Chandler, 2005; Fine, 2006; Miller, 2010; Saxton, 2009). Broadly defined as Animal-
Assisted Interactions (AAI), the benefits animals provide can be harnessed in a structured
way to assist individuals who are facing a crisis or desire growth in their physical,
emotional, social, cognitive, or spiritual realm.
Young adults are a cohort where current AAI research has not focused, in spite of
the high prevalence of stress in college students (Bland et al., 2012; Pedersen, 2012).
Yet, there remains incredible interest in AAI on the part of these students. One study
found 96% of the students surveyed expressed a positive interest in a pet therapy
program on campus (Adamle, Riley & Carlson, 2009, p. 546). A need remains for
justification to allow the benefits of AAI, but alleviate any potential risks. As Beck &
Katcher (2003) caution, To justify any risk associated with animal contact, we must

demonstrate a value to the patient. Therefore, the purpose of my research is to
document whether spending time with a therapy animal decreases a college students
self-reported stress level. Rather than being based on warm fuzzy feelings and not on
scientific data, this study attempted to document that short-term exposure to a therapy
animal can reduce the stress level of a college student (Rovner, 2012).
Literature Review
History. Florence Nightingale was the first prominent clinician to observe the
positive influence of animals in a health care setting. She documented the many benefits
of small companion animals on her chronically-ill patients (Fine, 2006; Hooker,
Holbrook Freeman, & Stewart, 2002; Morrison, 2007; Pichot & Coulter, 2006; Rovner,
2012; Sorrell, 2006). Her contemporary, Boris Levinson, is considered by many to be the
founder of AAI in a therapy setting. In the early 1960s, he unintentionally discovered
the benefits of an animal as a co-therapist when his dog, Jingles, facilitated a
breakthrough to a disturbed child who previously had been uncommunicative (Chandler,
2005; Fine, 2006; Hooker et al., 2002; Havener, Gentes, Thaler, Megel, Baun, Driscoll,
Beiraghi & Agrawal, 2000; Thompson, 2005).
One of the pioneers of modern research is Erika Friedmann, an expert in the field
of human-animal interactions. Friedmann created some of the most frequently cited
studies of AAI, which scientifically documented the impact of animals on humans
(Brodie & Biley, 1999; Giaquinto & Valentini, 2009; Havener et a., 2000; Herzog, 2011;
Hooker et al., 2002; Johnson & Meadows, 2002; Morrison, 2007; Rovner, 2012; &
Wilson & Barker, 2003). A 1980 study reviewed the one-year survival rate of 92
individuals who experienced a heart attack, comparing patients who owned a pet and

those who did not. The pet owners had a greater survival rate than those without pets
(Friedmann, Katcher, Lynch, & Thomas). A separate 1980 study found a meditative
reaction in individuals petting a dog, which lowered the persons state of arousal,
allowing the body to relax (Katcher & Friedmann). In 1983, Friedmanns study
measured the impact of a dogs presence on children, both while resting and during a
mildly stressful activity. The study found a significantly lower blood pressure for
children engaged in both activities when the dog was present (Friedmann, Katcher,
Lynch, Thomas & Messent).
Since then, the beneficial effect of animals on various aspects of a humans
physical, mental and emotional health have been studied in a myriad of settings, often
focusing on locations where individuals have some degree of permanence, such as long-
term care facilities, hospitals, schools, or prisons (Brodie & Biley, 1999; Jordan & Brady,
2004; Kawamura, Niiyama & Niiyama, 2007; Morrison, 2007; Rovner, 2012). Other
studies have focused on the benefits to specific audiences such as the elderly, children,
families, military personnel, psychiatric patients, those who are dying, and those who
have been abused (Barker, Barker, & Knisely, 2012; Brodie & Biley, 1999; Kawamura,
et al., 2007; Morrison, 2007; Muschel, 1984; Ruiz, 2012). Research has also documented
the positive impact of animals on individuals with specific disorders such as autism,
dementia, mental disorders, neurological disorders, physical disabilities and substance
abuse issues (Barker et al., 2012; Kawamura, et al., 2007; Morrison, 2007; Muschel,
1984; Ruiz, 2012).
Today, Pet Partners (formerly Delta Society) is a leading organization in AAI. A
national, non-profit organization founded in 1977, Pet Partners seeks to be, the leader in

demonstrating and promoting positive human-animal interaction to improve the physical,
emotional and psychological lives of those we serve through communication of
research, education of professionals, and training programs for therapy animals and their
handlers (Pet Partners, 2012). Pet Partners is attempting to create some uniformity in this
relatively new and rapidly growing field by establishing a training certification process
that registers therapy animals and therapy animal handlers, as well as working to
standardize the terms for this developing field. The typical therapy animal is a dog,
although Pet Partners registers many species of non-farm, domesticated animals such as
cats, rabbits, miniature horses, guinea pigs, and birds (Pet Partners, 2012).
Definition of Terms. There is a continuum of services which incorporate animals
into a healing relationship with humans. Service animals are animals individually
trained to provide assistance to an individual with a disability (Americans with
Disabilities Act, 1990). There is an important distinction between a service animal and a
therapy animal. Service animals are understood to be a tool for their owner, whereas the
therapy animal is viewed as a treatment intervention (Fine, 2006). Because service
animals are viewed as a tool, they are not legally viewed as pets. An animal owned by an
individual for companionship is often referred to as a pet, companion animal or
domesticated companion (Giaquinto & Valentini, 2009). Animal companions can offer
their owners a sense of non-verbal reassurance and tactile comfort that may help fend off
symptoms of loneliness and social isolation (Brodie & Biley, 1999). Even in this
conventional relationship, companion animals have an impact on the health of their
owner, as W.P. Andersons (1992) study on cardiovascular disease found. Of the 5,741
Australians who were screened for this disease, pet owners had significantly lower

systolic blood pressure and triglyceride levels than non-pet owners (cited in Brodie &
Biley, 1999 and Stanley-Hermanns & Miller, 2002).
As a nascent field, terminology is not universally accepted. AAI may also be
referred to as pet therapy, pet-facilitated therapy, animal-assisted therapy, or animal
companionship. For clarity, this paper will use the terms as offered by Pet Partners. AAI
is the overarching term under which there are two structured types of AAI: animal-
assisted activities (AAA) and animal-assisted therapy (AAT). AAA is understood as a
casual meet and greet by a trained animal and animal handler team to provide
opportunities for motivational, educational, recreational, and/or therapeutic benefits to
enhance quality of life (Pet Partners, 2012). AAA has neither treatment expectations
nor a specific time frame for the interactions. Best practices limit overall time spent to
two hours a day or less for the health and well-being of the animal. Similar activities are
repeated with many people, such as playing, walking, feeding treats, stroking or other
close physical contact (Chandler, 2005; Fine, 2006; Pichot & Coutler, 2006; Van Pelt,
2010). A study compared two groups of elderly residents in a long-term care facility. One
group of residents was exposed to AAA; whereby they interacted with puppies and their
handlers, and the other group spent an equal amount of time with only human visitors. The
study showed marked improvement in the social interaction, psychosocial function, life
satisfaction, mental functioning, level of depression, social competence and psychological
well-being in the animal-interaction group compared with the group who only interacted with
humans (Cusack & Smith, 1984).
Alternatively, AAT is a therapeutic, goal-directed interaction between the animal-
human team and the patient (PetPartners, 2012). Each visit has individualized treatment
goals and a set amount of time for each visit based on the patients needs. Treatment can

relate to physical or mental health. Typical mental health goals would be rapport
building, stress reduction, and increasing trust. Physical goals might be related to fine
motor coordination, such as brushing the fur of the therapy animal a certain number of
strokes during physical therapy, or speaking commands to the animal in speech pathology
(Anderson, 2011). AAT sessions are conducted by a licensed professional, who practices
within the scope of his or her profession, such as a social worker, psychologist, or
rehabilitation therapist. The professional facilitates the session, maintains written
progress notes, and aims to improve the social, cognitive, physical, or emotional needs of
the patient through individualized care. The animal handler may be the licensed
professional or the professional may coordinate services with a trained therapy animal
handler (Anderson, 2011; Chandler, 2005; Delta Society, 2012; Fine, 2006; King, 2007;
Pichot & Coutler, 2006; Thompson, 2005; Van Pelt, 2010). Barker & Dawson (1998)
compared the effect of AAT with more traditional recreational therapy on 231 acute
psychiatric patients. After a single session, both types of therapy positively impacted the
level of anxiety in patients with mood disorders. However, patients who experienced
psychotic, cognitive and other mental disorders only benefitted from the AAT session
(Barker, Barker & Knisely, 2012).
Risks. Of all the literature that exists about AAI, there is relatively little mention
of risk to the human. The only severe danger reported was a dog bite to a young child
which resulted in the suspension of a study examining the affect of trained PTSD service
dogs for military veterans (Huus, 2012; Ruiz, 2012). Most dangers focus on possible
allergic reaction or increase in stress from individuals who are afraid of dogs
(Haubenhofer & Kirchengast, 2006; St. Onge, 2000; Sorrell, 2006). Zoonosis, or

interspecies transmission of disease between humans and animals, is a potential risk from
interacting with animals (Brodie & Biley, 1999; Coughlan, Olsen, Boxrud & Bender,
2010, and Fine, 2006). However, there are few documented reports of zoonoses during
AAI. Registered therapy animal handlers are taught of this risk, and proper hand hygiene
is encouraged (Anderson, 2011). Registered therapy animals are required to be free of
disease as part of the registration process, and animals must be properly groomed prior to
each session (PetPartners, 2012). By following these best practices, using a registered
therapy animal, and adequately screening participants as to allergies or animal fears prior
to introducing the animal to a human during a study, these are manageable risks.
More difficult to control is risk to the animal. In certain psychiatric or corrections
settings, without close supervision, a therapy animal may be at risk for intentional harm
(Chandler, 2005; King, 2007; Pichot & Coulter, 2006). Visiting high-intensity care
facilities or hospitals, an animal is at risk for accidental harm as it quietly crosses paths
with feet, a wheelchair, or walker. An animal is also at risk of ingesting dropped
medication or other hazardous or toxic items (Pichot & Coulter, 2006). A 2006 study
demonstrated participating in therapy increases the cortisol secretions of a therapy dog,
indicating a state of elevated stress (Haubenhofer & Kirchengast, 2006). How does the
handler know when their therapy animal reaches a dangerous level of stress? Different
species demonstrate various behaviors to indicate stress. Registered therapy animal
handlers are taught what behaviors to watch for in their species. It is crucial for the
handler to know the indications for the species, as well the signs of their individual
animal (Anderson, 2011; Pet Partners, 2012). All these potential risks to a therapy
animal fuel the debate of whether it is ethical to allow an animal to participate in AAI, or

if it is exploitation of the animal (Zamir, 2006). In an effort to prevent animal
exploitation, some research institutions, such as the University of Minnesota, have
established committees whose role parallels that of the Institutional Review Boards for
human subjects. At the University of Minnesota, this group is called the Institutional
Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC). This group reviews all projects involving
animals to ensure that they are justified by their benefits and minimize any animal pain or
suffering that might occur (UMN, 2010).
Social Benefits. While benefits to therapy animals are questionable, numerous
studies have documented the many positive benefits of AAI with various human
populations. As Friedmann (1980) found, animals impact human beings in an integrative
way: socially, physically, and mentally. According to Brodie and Biley, animals have the
ability to incorporate nine enhancements into the life of their human counterpart, which
include providing companionship and pleasurable activity, facilitating exercise, play and
laughter, being something to care for and a source of consistency, allowing feelings of
security, being a comfort to touch and pleasurable to watch (1999). Animals increase
socialization and alleviate loneliness through their friendliness, openness, and ability to
be present. Partially, as King (2007) states, it is because animals are nonjudgmental,
accepting, attentive, dont talk back, [and] dont criticize (p. 2). People do not fear
rejection by an animal, and they begin to build trust which spills out into their
relationships with people (King, 2007). In addition, animals draw people together by
providing an enjoyable yet neutral topic of conversation (Hart, 1995). As Dr. Levinson
initially found, therapists can harness this ability to assist in forming a link between

themselves, the animal, and the client, as well as to build rapport (Havener et al., 2000;
Hooker et al., 2002).
Physical Health Benefits. A human receives many physical benefits from an
animals presence. A 1983 study by Friedmann, Katcher, Thomas, Lynch and Messent,
found when people speak to people, their blood pressure almost always rises. However,
when people speak to animals, their blood pressure typically falls and can even fall below
the level recorded when a subject is resting quietly (cited in Muschel, 1984; Pichot &
Coulter, 2006). In addition to the decrease in blood pressure, animals can lower heart
rate and have a calming effect (Brodie & Biley, 1999; Crawford & Pomerinke, 2003;
King, 2007; Stanley-Hermanns, M. & Miller, J. 2002). Similarly, AAI has been shown to
improve cardiopulmonary health, and have a calming effect on individuals who have
suffered from heart failure (Barker, Barker & Knisely, 2012; Cole, Gawlinski, Steers, &
Kotlerman, 2007; Friedmann, Katcher, et al. 1980). AAI has also shown positive and
statistically significant results with reducing pain levels and improving respiratory rates
in a pediatric acute care environment (Braun, Stangler, Narveson, & Pettingell, 2009).
Because physical health is closely tied to mental health, human emotional states also
show a positive impact from AAI.
Mental Health Benefits. There are many advantages for an individual who is
facing mental health issues to take part in AAI. Interacting with an animal can reduce
anxiety, despair, depression and stress levels (Becker, 2002). King (2007) also identified
that animals can indirectly make individuals feel better by making strange settings or
unfamiliar people seem less threatening (p. 2). This effect is supported by a study of an
adolescent inpatient facility where AAT with a therapy dog was introduced. Analysis

showed the interaction of the dog helped create a sense of calm, safety and protection in
adolescents. They viewed the dog as a friend, listener, comforter, teacher, distracter, and
therapist (Bardill & Hutchinson, 1997).
Mental health is closely tied to an overall sense of well-being. The well-being of
50 psychiatric patients who took part in AAT was studied by researchers. Data analysis
found 47 of the 50 participants improved significantly in the areas of responsibility,
physical activity, socialization, self-reliance and general psychological well-being.
Researchers attributed the increase to the animals ability to help fulfill the two basic
psychological needs of patients: to love and be loved, and to feel worthwhile to self and
others (Blankley, 2003). The importance of love and safe, non-threatening affection is a
key advantage of AAT (King, 2007; Pichot & Coulter, 2006).
One way of demonstrating affection is through touch. Animals allow a human to
fulfill a persons fundamental need for touch in an uncomplicated way (Sakson, 2009).
The tactile stimulation of stroking a pet offers additional benefits. A study of ten elderly
residents at a Texas care facility found that those engaged in petting and cuddling a dog
for five minutes a day demonstrated decreased anger, hostility, tension and anxiety
(Herzog, 2011; Stanley-Hermanns & Miller 2002). Another study exposed elderly care
center residents to farm animals at a Back-to-the-Farm Day. Observers found the
tactile experience appeared to produce dramatic changes. Very withdrawn or reclusive
patients started talking and communicating when given animals to hold, including
grinning, laughing and making eye contact (Kerr & Pratt, 1982). Perhaps fulfilling this
need for touch and affection is the key. Dr. Andrew Weil, a pioneer of integrative
medicine, stated one of the most fundamental advantages of AAT over other therapeutic

modalities is that it provides the patient a much-needed opportunity to give affection, as
well as receive it. It is this reciprocity - rare among medical therapies - that makes AAT a
unique and valuable route to healing (Pet Partners, 2012). This ability to offer and
receive safe, non-threatening, affectionate touch is an intrinsic need many college
students are lacking.
Animals in a College Setting. Todays college students might have even greater
needs than previous generations. According to the National Center for Education
Statistics, there is a greater percentage of women than men in college, (43 vs. 40 percent),
which is true across all racial and ethnic groups (2012). Several studies indicate that
college women report higher levels of overall stress than their male counterparts.
Additionally, women indicate feeling greater academic pressure than men (cited in
Pedersen, 2012). This pressure is compounded by the knowledge that students are
graduating with record debt levels. A study by the independent, non-profit Institute for
College Access & Success (TICAS) found approximately two-thirds (66%) of college
seniors who graduated in 2011 had student loan debt, with an average of $26,600 for
those with loans. Minnesota students graduate with the third highest debt in the nation,
with an average of $29,800. In addition, the students face a challenging job market, with
a post-graduation unemployment rate of 8.8 percent, slightly lower than the record high
of 9.1 percent on record in 2010 (Reed & Cochrane, 2012).
At a time of growth and transition, faced with the pressures of deadlines, grades
and financial worries, while away from their traditional support system, a student can feel
overwhelmed. An animals presence may offer a comforting alternative, a sense of
home; making the environment less fearful or threatening (King, 2007; Thompson, 2005).

Because animals are living examples of being present and living in the moment, they
can provide an important example to the student (Thompson, 2005). An animals natural
ability to engage a human provides stimulation and a feeling of connection for the
stressed college student, many of whom may be experiencing some degree of loneliness.
This gentle contact with an animal draws the students focus outside of themselves to
interact with the world around them. Their attention is focused on the positive of the
animal, instead of ruminating on their own worries or troubles (Pichot & Coulter, 2006).
Often when people speak to animals, they unconsciously touch them as well. This is
significant as Katcher (1982) has found, Touching can be highly effective in reducing
stress.
Animals can help alleviate more than stress. In 2004, Charnetski, Brennan &
Riggers studied the effect petting a dog had on the immune system of 55 college students.
Students were individually exposed to one of three settings: sitting in a quiet room alone,
sitting in a quiet room while stroking a stuffed animal, and sitting in a quiet room while
stroking a live dog. Saliva samples were taken before and after the time in the room.
Results indicated a significant correlation between increased immunity and petting the
live dog. The result was consistent whether or not the student previously had a positive
attitude toward pets. Using the Charnetski and colleagues (2004) study as a basis for this
study, college student participants in this study will spend time in a quiet room, in a quiet
room with a stuffed animal, in a quiet room with a live animal visible, and in a quiet
room while stroking the animal. This research will attempt to demonstrate a correlation
of decreased stress levels by students who have spent time with the live animal;
particularly those who actually engaging in stroking it.

Conceptual Framework
As a new and growing field, a nominal amount of literature exists in which
researchers and AAI professionals reference theory to guide their work. There are three
theories which offer help interpreting this study: attachment theory, social support theory
and the biophilia hypothesis. Those will be explored here.
Attachment Theory. Bowlbys Attachment Theory suggests a biological function
of protection and security beginning with a mother and her infant. The mere proximity of
the mother brings comfort to the child. Once formed, this bond is not easily severed. As
the child grows, the attachment continues, but can be generalized to others such as
grandparents or a teacher (Sable, 1995). As adults, attachment is more flexible.
Individuals may redirect their bond to build an attachment relationship with a network of
others. Because of their constant, nonjudgmental presence and responsive behaviors, pets
can offer the closeness, stability, and reciprocation an individual requires to form an
attachment bond. At times the animal may be a bridge to other human relationships, or in
the absence of others, can be a substitute for human attachment. (Brodie & Biley, 1999;
Fine 2006; Geist, 2011; Sable 1995). Brodie & Biley suggest humans have an innate
reaction to bond with young children, particularly when the young human is dependent
on that adult. Animals, who often demonstrate childlike behaviors, can easily activate
this response (1999).
There is some disagreement on whether forming bonds with animals, long term, is
desirable for humans. To explore this fully is beyond the scope of this study, but briefly,
Fine, citing a study by A.J. Cwik (1991), suggests animals should play the role of a
transitional object, rather than a substitute for a human relationship (2006). However,

existing literature is relatively unanimous in supporting that during AAI, certain animals
can offer the benefit of transitional object, as it is often easier for the client to build trust
with the animal, which eventually spreads to the relationship with the client and therapist
(Becker, 2002; Brodie & Biley, 1999; Fine, 2006; Havener et al., 2000; Hooker et al.,
2002; Sable, 1995).
Social Support Theory. Similar to the Attachment Theory, Social Support
Theory speaks to the innate need humans have for relationship in order to maintain
psychological well-being. Social companionship offers an individual a feeling of
connectedness. Being connected to others illuminates ones self-identity, offers
stimulation, provides a venue to give and receive affection, and can serve as external
validation (Brodie & Biley, 1999; Fine, 2006). There are positive health benefits
associated with these experiences (Beck & Katcher, 2003; Brodie & Biley, 1999).
Companion animals, by their continuous presence, have the opportunity to act as a
confidante. The uncomplicated nature of this relationship between different species
means the animal does not react in a negative way to painful secrets shared or a failure to
keep promises (Fine, 2006). The stability of this unconditional positive regard supports a
humans sense of well-being, as well as offers a positive model of relational skills.
Biophilia Hypothesis. According to McCulloch (1984), a relatively new
hypothesis stems from the Green Revolution (cited in Brodie & Biley, 1999). The
Green Revolution is defined as society trying to re-establish links with nature, including
plants and animals. E.O. Wilson (1984) posited evolutionary survival was linked to the
ability to secure food in hunting animals and gathering plants. Humans developed an
innate response to pay attention to the natural world (cited in Beck & Katcher, 2003). At

that same time, Ulrich (1984) produced a landmark study that combined nature and
health. He compared hospital stays of those who were exposed to nature and those who
were not. His study found patients who had the ability to view nature had a decrease in
length of stay, infection rate, need for pain medication, and stress level. Patients, and the
staff who tended to them, also had a higher satisfaction level of the experience (cited by
Bailey, 2010).
The Biophilia Hypothesis has important ramifications for todays young students.
Without the influence of the natural world, Richard Louv, child-advocacy expert and
journalist, suggests that this highly technical generation suffers from what he terms as
Nature Deficit Disorder. His research posits a correlation between time spent with
televisions, computers, video games and smartphones, and increased incidents of obesity,
depression, and other behavioral disorders. The lack of interaction with nature impacts
the physical and emotional health of this generation (Louv, 2008). Marti Erickson,
development psychologist and University of Minnesota professor, agrees. After engaging
5,000 ethnically-diverse, low-income, urban high school students in an outdoor
experience, Erickson surveyed their teachers and found 70% of them witnessed a deeper
engagement in the school work of these students after the experience, as well as
improved classroom attendance (Dooley, 2012).
College students face many stressors while being separated from their traditional
support network. Todays college students are facing additional stress with escalating
loan debt and an uncertain post-graduation job market. It is no surprise they are
experiencing the lowest emotional health on record. If, as Louvs Nature Deficit
Disorder suggests, there exists a correlation between time spent with technology instead

of nature and increased incidents of obesity, depression, and other behavioral disorders,
the research posits intentional interaction with nature will increase college students
mental health by mitigating some of the stress they experience.
A national study by S.R. Kellert (1980) of 3,107 randomly selected respondents
found a strong positive correlation between an individuals educational level and their
attitude toward animals; the higher the education level, the more positive the view.
Conversely, there was relative disinterest and lack of affection for animals among those
least educated (Hoage ed., 1989). If animals can decrease stress and those with more
education have a higher level of interest and affection for animals, it would seem animals
should be able to decrease the level of stress faced by college students. This study hoped
to demonstrate that spending time with animals will positively impact the level of stress
experienced by college students.
Methods
Subject. The sample for this study was a nonprobability, convenience sample of
college students at a small, private, female-only Midwestern university. This study
solicited participation of students who are pursuing an Associate, Bachelor or Graduate
degree. All students were invited to participate without regard to age, ethnicity, area of
study, or any other characteristic. Information was communicated to potential
participants through on-campus flyers, email, electronic campus bulletin board, faculty
invitation, and personal invitation. There was a goal of a minimum of 40 participants; 10
participants for each of the four groups. However, only 32 students actually participated,
eight in each of the four groups.

Setting. A meeting room on campus was reserved. This same room was used for
all groups to minimize any potential influence by the surroundings on the results of the
study. The environment of the room included comfortable seating, soft lighting, music,
and a window. The music played during the experience was electronic spa music (Balder
& Inhofer, 2000). The window was covered so viewing nature outside the window would
not impact the results. Individual participants remained in this setting for 18 minutes, the
same time allotted by the Charnetski (2004) study on which this project was based.
Group one, the control group, experienced the room as described above. The
second group experienced the same setting, but the opportunity to interact with a live
Dutch-breed rabbit was added. A rabbit was chosen for several reasons (Anderson,
2011). As a prey animal, it is content to sit still. Rabbits are small and gentle, so a fear
of this species is assumed less likely. Rabbits are acceptable to Muslim individuals who
practice Islam, and there are a number of Muslim students at this University. The rabbit
is a two-year old, therapy rabbit registered by Pet Partners. As Pet Partners requires, the
rabbit was held in a small, soft lapbed while wearing a harness attached to a leash. The
participant was handed the bed and invited to pet the rabbit. The proper way to stroke a
rabbit was demonstrated. This type of direction interaction with an animal which
involves focused attention, direct conversation and touch is called Explicit Observation
(MacNamara & Moga, 2012).
A third group used the same setting and had the same live therapy rabbit in the
room. However, for this group the rabbit remained in her wire cage with food, water and
toys, becoming a part of the rooms environment. Called Implicit Observation, the rabbit
was not discussed nor was direct interaction encouraged, but should serve to externalize

participants attention (MacNamara & Moga, 2012). The fourth group experienced the
same setting; however, a stuffed rabbit was offered to the participants and they were
invited to touch it in a manner that felt natural to them. A stuffed rabbit was used so
species of animal did not impact the participants perception of their experience. The
purpose of this group was to negate the tactile stimulation of stroking something soft
impacting stress level, rather than the interaction of stroking a live animal.
Procedure. Students were randomly assigned to one of the four groups, based on
the students schedule and available appointment times. At the time students volunteered
to participate, they were questioned if they had known allergies to rabbits or timothy hay.
Those who had allergies were placed in one of the groups without the live rabbit. As an
incentive for participation, students were given a $5 gift card to their choice of two local
retailers as compensation.
At the time of scheduling their appointment, students were emailed an electronic
copy of the consent form, which had prior approval by the St. Catherine University
Institutional Review Board (IRB), as well as by the researchers instructor and advisor,
Dr. Katharine Hill (see Appendix A). The consent form clarified the purpose of the
assignment, as well as steps taken to ensure no harm would come to the subject for
participating; including maintaining confidentiality. A special note was made that the
researcher, who is a staff member at this University, may see the student on campus after
participating. Prior to participating in the session, the subjects were offered a printed
version of the consent form. The researcher asked participants about their understanding
of the study and answered any questions the participants had about it. All volunteers then
chose to participate, and signed the consent form.

Students were invited to leave their belongings with the researcher, as they spent
time in three different rooms. Students met the researcher at a gathering area in the
hallway to complete the consent form. From there the students moved into a computer
lab to complete the online questionnaire. After completing their pre-test questionnaire,
the participants were led into the research setting. All participants were invited to just sit,
listen to the music and try to relax. The students in Group Two who experienced AAI
were shown how to hold the rabbits bed on their lap or cradle it in their arms. They were
instructed and shown how to pet the rabbit on her nose, on and between her ears, as well
as the top of her back. They were told not to touch her feet or her back near the tail. The
participants of Group Four were handed the stuffed rabbit and instructed to touch it in
any way that felt natural or enjoyable. After the research experience, the participants
returned to the computer lab to complete the post-test.
Data Collection. The subjects were asked to complete an online questionnaire
using Qualtrics software (see Appendix B). The questionnaire collected basic
demographic information. In addition, they completed The Pet Attitude Scale (PAS), an
18 question survey using a 7-point Likert scale to describe an individuals attitude toward
pets (Templer, Salter, Baldwin, Dickey & Veleber, 1981).
The PAS flowed directly into the Stress Arousal Checklist (SACL). The SACL is
a 30-item list of adjectives used in the differential measurement of stress and arousal
(MacKay, Cox, Burrows & Lazzerini, 1978). This measure defines stress as an
individuals subjective perception of the current situation as unpleasant or threatening
and arousal, in this case, is defined as a generalized state of increased physiological
activity without implication of positive or negative valuation of that state (Duckro,

Korytnyk & Vanderberg, 1989). An individual may experience stress or arousal
independent of each other (Duckro et al., 1989; King, Burrows & Stanley, 1983; MacKay
et al., 1978).
Participants were asked to rate their feelings on a 4-point scale at the moment they
took the survey. After spending time in the room, each individual was again asked to rate
their feelings using the same SACL scale. The PAS questions were not included in the
post-test. Each student spent approximately 30 minutes participating in the study,
including time spent completing the questionnaires and the time in the room. An
additional SACL was emailed to the participant the following day to see if the time spent
with the animal offered any enduring buffering effect.
Analysis Technique. The data from the participants responses was collected by
Qualtrics software. Qualtrics was able to match the pre-test, post-test and follow-up test
by participant. Data was converted for use in IBM SPSS statistics software. Data was
used to determine descriptive statistics, such as gender, degree-level, age range, and race.
Histograms were used to describe the range of the student participants PAS scores, stress
level and arousal pre-tests, stress level and arousal post-test, as well as stress and arousal
follow-up scores. Inferential statistics were analyzed using t-tests. Paired t-tests
compared the pre- and post-test scores for stress and arousal for all the students. A paired
t-test also compared the stress and arousal post-test scores to the follow-up scores of the
participants. Independent t-tests were used to analyze pairs of data within the four
different groups to determine if any relationship existed between the group experience
and change in stress or arousal level.

Limits of Research. There were limits to this research. This study was done at
only one college, whose population is almost entirely female. Only one species of animal
was used. The sample size was small and lacked diversity. Stress and arousal levels
were based entirely on student self-report measures. Students were involved in this study
at only one point in the academic year, between mid-February and mid-March, just
following a six-week break that ended the beginning of February. This is a relatively low
stress time of the academic year.
Findings
Descriptive Statistics. The focus of this study was on the relationship between
college students stress level and interaction with a therapy animal. The 32 college
student participants in the study were all female (100%), which is understandable as 31 of
the students (96.875%) were bachelor-degree seeking students at a baccalaureate college
that only admits women. Although the study was open to all degree levels, only one
graduate student (3.125%) participated and no associate-degree seeking students opted to
take part in the study. The majority of students were in their first, second, and third year.
Table 1 depicts the participant by year in college.
Table 1. Participant Year in College

Answer # of Responses % of Respondents
Associate 0 0
First Year 11 34%
Sophomore 8 25%
Junior 9 28%
Senior 3 9%
Graduate 1 3%
32 100%


The age of participant was also recorded. Students ages ranged from 18 years to
over 56 years. Students were asked to indicate their age from a pre-selected range of
options provided. Table 2 demonstrates the age ranges provided, as well as the count of
participants by age. The majority of the students were under 25, with the highest number
of students between age 18 and 20 years.
Table 2. Age Range of Participants

Answer # of Responses % of Respondents
18-20 18 56%
21-25 7 22%
26-35 2 6%
36-45 3 9%
46-55 1 3%
56+ 1 3%
32 100%

Students were also asked to indicate their ethnicity/race. No labels were
provided, allowing the students to choose how to identify themselves. This question was
not required, but all students chose to answer it. Of the 32 students who participated,
students identified the following categories: Caucasian, white, Asian, Asian Hmong,
Hispanic, Hispanic/Latino, and Black/African American. Because of the small sample,
similar labels were combined to assist in calculating relationships. Caucasian and white
were combined; Asian and Asian Hmong were combined, and Hispanic and
Hispanic/Latino were combined. Table 3 illustrates the participants by race.
Table 3. Race of Participants
Race # of Responses % of Respondents
Black / African American 1 3%
Hispanic / Hispanic Latino 2 6%
Asian / Asian Hmong 6 19%
Caucasian 23 72%


All participants were asked to complete the Pet Attitude Scale (PAS) prior to
participation (Templer, Salter, Dickey, Baldwin, & Veleber, 1981). This scale indicates a
persons affinity toward animals. PAS score can range from 18 to 126, with the
correlation that the higher the score, the higher the persons regard of animals. The
students in this study had scores which ranged from 60 to 122. Table 4 shows that, of
the 32 respondents, the mean is 101.50 with a standard deviation of 14.188. The
histogram in Figure 1 shows the responses are positively skewed, because the data is
concentrated to the right of the histogram. This indicates more of these students hold a
positive attitude toward pets.
Table 4. Student Pet Attitude Scale
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic
Pet Attitude 32 62 122 101.5 14.188
Valid N (listwise) 32


Figure 1. Student Pet Attitude Scale
Student Stress Pre-test and Post-test Information. In addition to the PAS,
students rated their stress and arousal level using the Stress-Arousal Checklist (SACL)
prior to participation (MacKay et al., 1978). The scale has two different scores; a stress
score which can range from 0 to 18, and an arousal score which has a range from 0 to 12.
Higher scores reflect more stress and higher arousal. In the stress pre-test, the 32
students scores ranged from 1 to 15 (M = 8.72, sd = 4.252) as shown in Table 5. The
histogram in Figure 2 shows a normal bell curve for student stress, but the data is slightly
skewed to the left.

Table 5. Student Stress Pre-test and Post-test Scores
Descriptive Statistics
Stress Pre-test 32 1 15 8.719 4.252
Stress Post-test 32 0 11 2.313 2.389

Figure 2. Student Stress Pre-test
Following their experience, students were again asked to complete the SACL. In
the post-test, students stress scores ranged from a low of 0 to a high of 11 (M = 2.31, sd =
2.329), as shown in Table 5. All but three of the students (9.375%) scores showed a
reduction in stress. Two of those students, one participant from Group 2 and one from
Group 4, had a score of 1 in the pre-test, indicating a very low stress level prior to the
research experience. Following the experience, their score remained at 1. A third
student, from Group 4, had a high pre-test stress score of 11 and it remained 11 on the

post-test. The histogram in Figure 3 shows a negative skew to the data, with most of the
scores between 0 and 3 indicating the majority of the students were less stressed
following their research relaxation experience.

Figure 3. Student Stress Post-test
Student Arousal Pre- and Post-test Information. The SACL measured 32
students arousal level prior to the experience. Pre-test scores ranged from 0 to 11 (M =
4.47, sd = 2.874), as show in Table 6. The histogram in Figure 4 indicates a standard bell
curve for the student arousal score data in the SACL pre-test.
Table 6. Student Arousal Pre-test and Post-test Scores
Arousal Pre-test 32 0 11 4.469 2.874
Arousal Post-test 32 0 11 4.594 3.378

Figure 4. Student Arousal Pre-test
The arousal score range in the post-test remained the same, with scores ranging
from 0 to 11 (M = 4.59, sd = 3.378), as shown in Table 6. However, as the Histogram in
Figure 5 shows, the scores were more evenly distributed with a notable exception of a
spike in the score of 2.

Figure 5. Student Arousal Post-test
Student Follow-up Stress and Arousal Information. Students were asked to
complete the SACL one additional time, approximately 24 hours after their experience.
Only 28 of the 32 students completed this additional scale (87.5%). For this follow-up
test, the stress scores ranged from 0 to 15 (M = 7.5, sd = 5.07), as shown in Table 7.
Figure 6 shows a standard bell curve.
Table 7. Student Stress Follow-up Scores
Stress Follow-up 28 0 15 7.5 5.066


Figure 6. Student Stress Follow-up

The 28 students who participated in the follow-up survey had arousal scores
which ranged from 1 to 12 (M = 4.68, sd = 3.28), shown in Table 8. The histogram
(Figure 7) was negatively skewed with the data collected to the left side of the graph,
indicating most students were experiencing a lower level of arousal.
Table 8. Student Arousal Follow-up Scores
Arousal Follow-up 28 1 12 4.679 3.278


Figure 7. Student Arousal Follow-up

I nferential Statistics: The research question for this study is: What is the effect of
a therapy animal on college students stress and arousal level? There were four groups,
each with a different experience.
Group 1 was the control group; they sat on a comfortable chair in a softly-lit
room with soft music.
Group 2 was the therapy rabbit group; participants were able to hold, stroke
and talk to the live therapy rabbit, while sitting in the same environment as
Group 1.
Group 3 was the rabbit observation group in which participants sat in the
same environment as Group 1, but the therapy rabbit was added. The

participants did not interact with the rabbit, as the rabbit in her wire cage
was just part of the environment.
Group 4 was the touch control group in which participants were asked to
stroke a stuffed rabbit while sitting in the same environment as Group 1.
Paired T-test of Pre- and Post-test Scores for All Participants. A paired t-test
was used to analyze the pre- and post-test for both stress and arousal for the combined
mean of all participants. Table 9 and 10 show the results of these t-tests comparing the
students mean pre-test score with the students mean post-test score for both stress and
arousal. The respondents mean pre-test stress score was 8.72. After their research
experience, the students mean stress score was 2.31. The difference of these mean
scores is 6.41. Therefore, the students reported feeling less stress after their experience.
The respondents arousal mean pre-test score was 4.47. In their post-test score, the
students mean arousal score was 4.59. This difference is a .12 increase, indicating only
a slight rise in arousal after the research experience.
Table 9. Statistics of All Student Stress and Arousal Pre-test and Post-test Scores
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean N Std.
Deviation
Std. Error Mean
Pair 1 StressPre 8.72 32 4.252 .752
StressPost 2.31 32 2.389 .422
Pair 2 ArousalPre 4.47 32 2.874 .508
ArousalPost 4.59 32 3.378 .597
Table 10. T-test of Student Stress and Arousal Pre-test and Post-test Scores
Paired Differences
95% Confidence Interval
of the Difference

Sig.
Lower Upper
t df
(2-tailed)
Pair 1 StressPre-StressPost 4.947 7.865
8.955 31
.000
Pair 2 ArousalPre-Arousal
Post

-1.581

1.331 -.175 31

.862

The paired samples t-test for the stress pre-test and post-test is p = .000.
Therefore, the p-value for this t-test is p<.05, showing a statistically significant decrease
in all students reported stress level after their experience, regardless of which group they
were a part. The paired samples test for the arousal pre- and post-test is a p-value of
.862. Since the p-value is greater than .05, the results of this data are not statistically
significant. As a whole, there was not a significant change in the students arousal level
after their experience.
These overall student results remained fairly consistent when stress and arousal
pre-tests and post-tests were compared by group experience. For Group 1, the control
group, the p-value for the stress score was .003, indicating a statistically significant
relationship. The p-value for the arousal score was greater than .05, at p = .195,
indicating it is nonsignificant. The stress pre- and post-test comparison for Group 2, the
interactive therapy rabbit group, had a p-value of .001; therefore p<.05, indicating a
statistically significant difference in stress level. The arousal pre- and post-test
comparison for Group 2 had a p-value of .386, or p>.05, indicating it was not statistically
significant. Group 3, the therapy rabbit observation group, had a p-value of .005, again
indicating a statistically significant relationship between the pre- and post-test stress
level. The arousal score was .609, indicating it was not statistically significant. For
Group 4, the stuffed rabbit group, the p-value for the stress pre-test and post-test
comparison was .014, or p<.05, indicating a statistically significant difference. The
difference in the arousal score was p=1.0, or statistically nonsignificant.
Table 11 and Figure 8 illustrate the change in stress and arousal by group. The
bar chart shows the control group, Group 1, had a significant average decrease in stress (-

6.875) and arousal (-2.125). While the average of all students stress levels decreased,
the most significant decrease was in Group 2, those that spent time interacting with the
therapy rabbit (-7.5). Interestingly, this same group also had an average increase in
arousal (1.375). Not only were these students more relaxed on average, but they were
also more alert. Group 3 had the rabbit as part of their environment. Those participants
had less of an average decrease in stress than the other groups (-5.25), but this group also
had an increase in their average state of arousal (1.25). Group 4, whose participants
interacted with a stuffed rabbit, had an average decrease in stress (-6) and no change to
their arousal level.
Table 11. Student Stress and Arousal Change by Group
Avg. Change in Stress Avg. Change in Arousal
Group 1
-6.875 (sd = 4.454) -2.125 (sd = 4.190)
Group 2
-7.500 (sd = 3.964) 1.375 (sd = 4.207)
Group 3
-5.250 (sd = 2.493) 1.250 (sd = 4.528)
Group 4
-6.000 (sd = 4.047) 0 (sd = 2.726)

Figure 8. Student Stress and Arousal Change by Group


Correlation between PAS and Stress and Arousal Post-test Change. Students
were given the Pet Attitude Scale to determine if a relationship potentially exists between
an individuals feelings about animals and a change in their stress or arousal level after
exposure to an animal. The interval variable of PAS have a potential score range from 18
to 126. The second, ratio variable was the stress and arousal scores from the SACL.
These score have a range from 0 to 12 (arousal) and 0 to 18 (stress).
The research hypothesis for this section is: there is no relationship between a
students attitude about pets and the impact of an animal on the stress and arousal level of
college students. The inferential statistics of the relationship between the two variables,
Pet Attitude and Stress/Arousal level, are illustrated in Table 12, 13 and 14.
Table 12. Descriptive Statistics
Mean Standard Deviation N
Pet Attitude 101.50 14.188 32
Stress Change -6.41 4.047 32
Arousal Change .13 4.038 32

Table 13. Correlations between Pet Attitude and Stress Change
Pet Attitude Stress Change
Pet Attitude Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
1

32
.201
.269
32
Stress Change Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.201
.269
32
1

32

Table 14. Correlations between Pet Attitude and Arousal Change
Pet Attitude Arousal Change
Pet Attitude Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
1

32
.040
.828
32
Arousal Change Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.040
.828
32
1

32

Table 13 illustrates the calculated correlation between Pet Attitude and the change
in the student stress level (r = .201, p = 269). Table 14 shows the inferential statistics of

Pet Attitude and the change in student arousal level (r = .040, p = .828). The p-value is
greater than .05; therefore, the results of this study support the hypothesis that there is not
a significant relationship between a persons attitude about pets and whether their stress
level or arousal level is impacted by exposure to an animal.
Independent Samples T-tests Comparing Stress and Arousal Changes
between Two Different Groups. Independent samples t-test were run between several
different pairs of groups. Comparing the control group (Group 1) to the combined scores
from the two live animal groups (Group 2 & 3) found a nonsignificant difference (p =
.762) between the change in stress scores from the control group (m = -6.88, sd = 4.454)
to the groups with the live rabbit (m = -6.38, sd = 3.403). Therefore, interacting with a
live rabbit did not significantly change a participants stress score, which decreased either
way.
An independent samples t-test was run on the arousal scores of these same groups.
The control group (m = -2.13, sd = 4.190) and the groups with the animal present (m =
1.13, sd = 4.222) showed a nonsignificant difference (p = .073) in the change, although
the control group decreased in their arousal and both animal groups increased arousal
after their experience.
When comparing the stress scores from the control group (Group 1) (m = -6.88,
sd 4.454) and only those students who had contact with the therapy rabbit (Group 2) (m =
-7.50, sd = 3.964), an independent samples t-test again found a nonsignificant difference
(p = .771) between the change in the two groups. The change in arousal scores from the
control group (m = -2.13, sd = 4.190) and the therapy rabbit group (m = 1.38, sd 4.207)

found there was not a significant statistical difference (p = .118) between the students
who had no contact with an animal and those who petted a therapy rabbit.
Comparing the change in stress scores of Group 2, students who interacted with
the therapy rabbit (m = -7.50, sd 3.964), and Group 3, the students who were in the room
with the rabbit, but did not have any structured interaction (m = -5.25, sd 2.493), an
independent samples t-test showed a nonsignificant statistical difference (p = .196).
Although both groups who were exposed to the live rabbit were the only two groups who
demonstrated an increase in arousal score, the independent samples t-test showed those
student who were allowed to pet the rabbit (m = 1.38, sd 4.207) had no significant
statistical difference (p = .955) to those students who were simply exposed to the rabbit
(m = 1.25, sd 4.528).
A stuffed rabbit was used to discern if there was a difference for students who
petted a soft, live rabbit versus those who petted a soft, stuffed rabbit. An independent
samples t-test failed to show a statistically significant difference between the stress score
change for students with the live rabbit (m = -7.50, sd 3.964) than the stress change for
students with the stuffed rabbit (m = -6.00, sd = 5.237) t(14) = .650, p = .529. Likewise
the arousal score change for the students with the live rabbit (m = 1.38, sd 4.207) and the
arousal score change for students with the stuffed rabbit (m = .00, sd = 2.726) found no
significant statistical difference t(14) = .776, p = .451.
Paired Samples T-test Comparing Stress and Arousal Post-test and Follow-
up Scores. A paired samples t-test was run to analyze the difference in the stress post-
test score and the stress follow-up score (24 hours later), as well as a t-test comparing the

arousal post-test score and the arousal follow-up score. Results are shown in Tables 15
and 16.
Table 15. Statistics of All Student Stress and Arousal Post-test and Follow-up Scores
Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Pair 1 StressPost 2.39 28
2.529 .478
StressFollow-up 7.86 28
5.090 .962
Pair 2 ArousalPost 4.57 28
3.436 .649
Arousal Follow-up 4.68 28
3.278 .619

Table 16. T-test of Student Stress and Arousal Post-test Scores and Follow-up
Paired Differences
95% Confidence Interval of
the Difference

Sig.
Lower Upper
t df
(2-tailed)
Pair 1 StressPost-StressFollow-up -7.828 -3.101
-4.744 27
.000
Pair 2 ArousalPost-Arousal Follow-up -1.691 1.405 -.145 27 .885

The respondents mean post-test stress score was 2.39. A day after their research
experience, the students mean stress score was 7.86, an increase of 5.47. Therefore, the
students reported an increase in stress a day after their experience t(27) = 4.744, p =
.000. The respondents arousal mean post-test score was 4.57. In their follow-up score,
the students mean arousal score was 4.68. This difference is a .11 increase, indicating
only a slight rise in arousal a day after the research experience t(27) = .145, p = .885.
Paired T-Test Post and Follow-up Scores for Stress and Arousal by Group.
Paired t-tests analyzed the combined mean of participants post and follow-up scores for
both stress and arousal by group experience. None of the groups t-tests suggested a
relationship between the arousal post-test and follow-up scores. Only two of the four
stress post and follow-up t-tests showed a statistical significance. Both Group 1 (the

control group) and Group 2 (the therapy rabbit group) had a statistically significantly
higher stress follow-up score the following day. Table 17 and 18 show the results for
these two groups.
Table 17. Statistics of Student Stress Post-test and Follow-up Scores for Groups 1 & 2
Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Group 1 StressPost 2.25 8
1.982 .701
StressFollow-up 10.38 8
4.470 1.580
Group 2 StressPost 1.86 7
1.345 /5-9
Stress Follow-up 9.00 7
5.033 1.902

Table 18. T-test of Student Stress Post-test and Follow-up Scores for Groups 1 & 2
Paired Differences
95% Confidence Interval of
the Difference

Sig.
Lower Upper
t df
(2-tailed)
Group 1 StressPost-StressFollow-up -12.398 -3.852
-4.496 7
.003
Group 2 StressPost-StressFollow-up -11.259 -3.027 -4.246 6 .005

The hypothesis for the inclusion of this follow-up test was to determine if there
was a residual buffering affect for those who interacted with animals. The null
hypothesis is that there is no relationship between an animal interaction and residual
stress relief. These findings t(7) = -4.496, p. = .003 suggest a relationship between Group
1 students post-test scores (m = 2.25, sd = 1.982) and the follow-up scores (m = 10.38,
sd = 4.470). The stress scores for Group 1 increased, meaning the students stress levels
increased the day following their relaxation experience. Likewise, Group 2 students post-
test scores (m = 1.86, sd = 1.345) were significantly lower than the next days follow-up
scores (m = 9.00, sd 5.033). The increase in the mean the following day suggests a

statistically significant relationship t(6) = -4.246, p = .005. The findings of these studies
support the null hypothesis.
Discussion
This study focused on determining if a relationship exists between college
students stress level and interaction with a therapy animal. Because of the previous
research, this study posits that a college students stress level would decrease after
interacting with a therapy animal; particularly those who actually engaging in stroking
the animal (Brodie & Biley, 1999; Crawford & Pomerinke, 2003; King, 2007; Stanley-
Hermanns, M. & Miller, J. 2002). Some of the findings of this study support this
assumption, as the students stress level decreased by 7.5 points on an 18-point scale after
the therapy rabbit interaction. However, all of the four groups demonstrated a
statistically significant decrease in their stress level after their relaxation experience (p =
000). Although the decrease in stress level of the students who held the therapy rabbit
was the largest of the four groups, analysis did not find a statistically significant decrease
when compared to the other three groups.
The researcher is not aware of the correlation of arousal and interaction with
animals measured in previous literature. However, Brodie and Biley suggest feeling
connected to others offers stimulation (1999). This concept is also suggested by the
Biophilia Hypothesis (McCulloch, 1984). The arousal scores prior to the experience
found the student mean arousal level was 4.46 on an 11 point scale. After the experience,
the mean arousal level was virtually unchanged at 4.59. However, as shown in Figure 8,
there was an interesting pattern in how the arousal changed after the interaction. The
group who stroked a stuffed animal had no change in their arousal level. The control

group decreased in arousal by a mean of -2.13. The researcher observed the students
from this group were relaxed to the point of being sleepy after their experience. Whereas
both groups who were exposed to the rabbit had an increase in arousal by a combined
average mean score of 1.31 between the two groups, with those who directly interacted
with the therapy rabbit at a mean score of 1.38, and those who were just exposed to the
rabbit at a mean score of 1.25.
Further analysis did not find a statistically significant difference in the arousal
levels of students who were in the control group versus those who were exposed to the
animal (p = .073). However, researcher observed students were talkative and happy after
their experience with the rabbit. Participants from the therapy rabbit groups tended to
linger after their experience and wanted to engage the researcher in conversation about
the rabbit and their own pets at home. While the data did not indicate a statistical
advantage to the animal interaction, the students did seem to benefit from the social
interaction and touch of the rabbit in their experience, as discussed by Friedmann (1980
& 1983), King (2007), and others. The rabbit also served as a catalyst for conversation,
as identified by Hart (1995), Havener et al. (2001) and Hooker et al. (2002). These
observations point to the need for different kinds of measures for future studies. Perhaps
adding some qualitative data collection to capture these personal experiences would add
some depth and clarity to a study of this type.
Measuring the stress and arousal levels approximately 24 hours after the research
experience was an attempt to discover if spending time with an animal had any residual
buffering effect against stress. Some colleges bring animals to visit for a day during
finals week (Adamle et al., 2009; Gaterud, 2011; Kueser, 2013). If a student has a

chance to interact with an animal one day, will any benefit remain if the individual has
finals the next day? While the study failed to support a beneficial buffering effect for any
of the groups, the follow-up study did support that the experience of the control group
(Group 1) and the therapy rabbit group (Group 2) did offer a stress reduction to the
students the day of their experience as their stress level returned to a higher average stress
level, similar to that measured in the pre-test.
The 2004 Charnetski et al. study, on which this research was based, found a
significant correlation between increased immunity and petting a live dog. The result
was consistent whether or not the student previously had a positive attitude toward pets.
Using Templers same Pet Attitude Scale, this study also found no correlation between a
students attitude toward animals and the change in student stress level (r = .201, p = 269)
or the student arousal level (r = .040, p = .828). Students benefitted from the relaxation
experience regardless of their opinion of animals. However, overall the students in this
study held a very positive attitude towards animals, with a mean score of 101.5 out of a
possible range of 18 to 126. This result supports the positive interest (96%) college
students have in animals and AAI found in the Adamle, Riley & Carlson study (2009).
Limitations of this Study. This study was a small convenience, non-probability
sampling. As such, its results are not able to be generalized to the larger population. The
32 college student participants were from a Minnesotan private university, all female
(100%), primarily between 18 20 years old (56%), with a high concentration of first
year college students (34%). Research suggests these students are the highest risk
category for college stress.

The overwhelming majority of students in this study fall in the highest risk
category for college stress. They are studying at a private university in Minnesota.
Minnesota students graduate with the third highest debt in the nation (Reed & Cochrane,
2012). It is likely that, as students at a private university, these participants are at the
higher end of Minnesota student debt. As women, these students are at risk of higher
levels of overall stress than their male counterparts (cited in Pedersen, 2012). As young,
first year students, these participants are in the midst of transitions, facing an array of
academic, financial and social challenges (Misra & Castillo, 2004). This is all
happening at a point in time when the nations college freshman are reporting the lowest
emotional health since it was first measured in 1985 (Hurtado, 2010). However, contrary
to these risks, the students who participated in this study reported a relatively low initial
stress level, as shown in Figure 2: Student Stress Pre-test. These studies were held at the
beginning of the Spring semester. Students were just returning from an approximately
six-week J-term break, and were not embroiled in the stress that surrounds the
commitments of midterms or finals. It is possible this study, if held around midterms or
finals, might reveal higher stress levels in these same participants. Because of the low
stress level in these students, perhaps there is some other support at this university which
is reducing student stress. Conducting a research study at one or several different
universities might reveal stress levels more closely mirroring the statistics cited, which
may impact the results of a future study.
I mplications for Social Work Research. While the results of this test did support
the hypothesis that a therapy rabbit would decrease a college student stress level, the
results were inconclusive as to the specific benefit of a therapy rabbit, as opposed to

another intervention. Perhaps if future research had a larger, more diverse sample, trends
might become clearer. Because these students had a relatively low initial stress level, it
would be important to research individuals who are experiencing more stress, perhaps
replicating this experience during finals time. Another important aspect would be to
measure if the stress reduction had an academic benefit. Can students who spent time
with a therapy animal actually perform better academically than students who have not
had that experience?
There is an association between academic achievement and engagement. Student
retention research has shown that high levels of student engagement are positively
associated with higher student satisfaction, retention and academic achievement (Kuh,
Kinzie, Buckley, Bridges & Hayek, 2006). As noted earlier, interacting with the therapy
rabbit seemed to elicit conversation and engagement among the student participants.
Future research measuring participant engagement could be beneficial. Social workers in
educational settings can incorporate therapy animals into their work with students, which
will help nurture the relationship between the social worker and the student. AAI may
also serve to increase student academic performance and level of satisfaction with their
school experience, thereby helping the student to follow through on their education to
completion.
The interesting trend of a therapy animal increasing a students arousal level
would lend itself to some further study. Arousal has a direct academic link. Literature
suggests arousal can be elevated by high cognitive demand. In addition, elevated arousal
has been shown to increase an individuals performance (Dienstbier, 1989; King,
Burrows & Stanley, 1983). The results of this project suggest AAI during finals time

may be beneficial to students by increasing his or her arousal level prior to an important
exam and thus increasing that individuals level of performance.
Since this experience was structured as a relaxation experience, it would be
interesting to see how a students arousal level would be affected by a normal interaction.
Many colleges offer their students an interaction with animals during finals week, e.g.
Harvard Law School, University of Minnesota, University of Connecticut Storrs,
University of New Hampshire, University of Wisconsin Madison, and Yale Medical
School (Adamle et al., 2009; Gaterud, 2011; Kueser, 2013). These occur in a common
setting, such as the library or another large space where many people gather. A study that
measured how the type of setting used for AAI impacts the benefit to student participants
might be helpful. Is there a greater benefit to a large group of students sharing this
experience, or does the group dynamic increase their stress? Perhaps the arousal trend
would be more significant to individuals participating in AAI, if it was not being
mitigated by a relaxation experience, as in this study.
Future studies in AAI should explore the potential correlation of type of therapy
animals used in different settings. When offering AAI, are certain species of animals
better suited for different environments? The Charnetski et al. study (2004) used a dog in
their college student experiment. That study found a statistically significant correlation
between students who petted the dog and an increase in immune system function. Rabbits
are the fifth most popular pet in the United States (American Veterinary Medicine
Association, 2012). There are approximately 1.4 million American households which
have rabbits, as compared to 70 million dogs and 74.1 million cats. Perhaps college
students might find a higher reduction in stress if the therapy animal offered mirrored that

of the companion animal in their own home. Or, maybe on-the-go college students find
the outgoing exuberance of a dog more appealing. Whereas the quiet nature of a rabbit or
purring cat may be more appealing in a care facility, hospital, or preschool setting.
I mplications for Social Work Practice. Nevertheless, the results of this study
clearly indicated the students benefitted from any of the stress-relieving interactions. The
interaction with a therapy rabbit did decrease a students stress level. Social workers who
choose to incorporate a therapy animal into their practice, either partnering with a trained
therapy animal handler or becoming one themselves, can offer their clients an additional
way to reduce their stress level. Social workers who work in school settings should be
specifically mindful of high stress times in their general population. Social workers at
the college level can elicit the support of local therapy animal groups to visit during
midterms or finals.
Currently most colleges invite groups of trained volunteer animal handlers to visit
campus during high stress times (Adamle et al., 2009; Anderson, 2011; Gaterud, 2011;
Kueser, 2013). This is a very cost-effective, relatively low-risk way to offer this type of
intervention, which has been shown to be highly appealing to college students. While
mindfulness techniques such as breathing, meditating, or taking a mental break have been
shown to relieve student stress, offering AAI to student clients may be a way to entice
students to take a beneficial, short break, which they might not otherwise allow
themselves to do (Chang et al., 2004; Rosenzweig, Reibel, Greeson, Brainard & Hojat,
2003; Shapiro, Schwartz & Bonner, 1998; Williams, Kolar, Reger & Pearson, 2001).
The trend of colleges and other institutions seeking volunteer AAI services seems
to be increasing. It is possible the need could outpace the supply of trained volunteers.

Some universities, like the University of Minnesota, are moving toward professional AAI
services (Bailey, 2013). Not only would this secure the availability of these services, but
AAI could be offered on an ongoing basis. As a relaxation-based technique, AAI might
be better suited as a sustainable practice. The intervention could be modeled after
mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR).
The typical MBSR intervention is comprised of eight weekly group sessions, each
of which consists of an hour discussion on topics such as body awareness or focus on
breath, 45 minutes of meditation practice, and 45 minutes of mindful movement, such as
yoga. In addition, individuals incorporate 45 minutes of daily meditation on their own
(Chang et al., 2004). College students who participated in MBSR have shown a
reduction in stress, an increase an individuals sense of control and reduced symptoms of
depression (Astin, 1997; Chang et al, 2004). Dienstbier (1989) cautions against using
only relaxation-based techniques. Therapists use relaxation-based therapies to help
clients overcome stressful situations and decrease elevated arousal. However, without
also incorporating coping mechanisms into their therapy, it is possible students will
experience only short-term relief and not build the emotional toughness to tolerate similar
future situations. A professional using AAI would have the necessary skills to help
student reduce stress, while also assisting with coping skills.
Conclusion
College is a stressful time for students. As Laurel Rabschutz, PhD and Pet
Partners Therapy Handler, states, College students face many of the same issues as the
elderly; living away from home, often leaving pets behind, and adjusting to an
impersonal institution (Kueser, 2013). Animals offer a positive influence in that they

increase socialization and alleviate loneliness through their openness, responsiveness, and
ability to be present (Chandler, 2005; Fine, 2006; Miller, 2010; Saxton, 2009). In
addition, as this study indicated, interacting with an animal has been shown to reduce
anxiety, despair, depression, and stress (Becker, 2002; Blankley, 2003; King, 2007;
Pichot & Coulter, 2006). The positive effect an animal has on a human, coupled with the
overwhelmingly positive interest in which college students view animals, offers a natural
association to address their increasing stress levels and the consequence of increasing
health care costs that accompany it (Adamle, Riley & Carlson, 2009; Greenberg et al.,
1999). The enthusiasm college students demonstrate toward animals may mitigate some
of the excuses students express about not engaging in more traditional mental health
methods, such as talk therapy, mindfulness techniques, or simply taking a break. There is
no social stigma about spending time with a therapy animal. Most students express a
positive interest in animals and may make time for this interaction. Incorporating
registered therapy animals for this work is a low-risk, cost-effective way to assist students
who are experiencing the growing pains that come with this age.

References
Adamle, K.N., Riley, T.A., Carlson, T. (2009). Evaluating College Student Interest in
Pet Therapy, Journal of American College Health, 57(5): 545-548.
Americans with Disabilities Act (1990). Section 35.104. Definitions.
http://www.ada.gov/regs2010/titleII_2010/titleII_2010_withbold.htm
American Veterinary Medicine Association (2012). US Pet Ownership & Demographic
Sourcebook. Retrieved from
https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/Statistics/Pages/Market-research-statistics-
US-Pet-Ownership-Demographics-Sourcebook.aspx.
Anderson, P. (2011, April). Introduction to Animal Therapy. Information session
conducted at the Animal Humane Society, Golden Valley, MN.
Astin, J. (1997). Stress reduction through mindfulness meditation: effects on
psychological symptomatology, sense of control, and spiritual experiences,
Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 66(2): 97-106.
Bailey, T. (2010, June). Natural Connections over the Lifespan for Human Health &
Wellness. Graduate social work class presentation for Integrative Psychotherapy,
University of St. Thomas, St. Paul, MN.
Balder, P. & Inhofer, G. (2000). Escape to the Spa: Music for Health and Wellness.
Minneapolis, MN. Metacom Music, Inc.
Bardill, N. and Hutchinson, S. (1997), Animal-Assisted Therapy With Hospitalized
Adolescents. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing, 10: 1724.
doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6171.1997.tb00208.x
Barker, R.T., Barker, S.B. & Knisely, J.S. (2012). Research on Benefits of Canine-
Assisted Therapy for Adults in Nonmilitary Settings, U.S. Army Medical
Department Journal, April-June: 30-39.
Beck, A.M. & Katcher, A.H. (2003). Future Directions in Human-Animal Bond
Research, American Behavioral Scientist, 47(1): 79-93.
Becker, M. (2002). The Healing Power of Pets, New York, NY: Hyperion.
Berg, B.L. (2009). Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences (7
th
Ed.).
Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Bland, H.W., Melton, B.F., Welle, P, & Bigham, L. (2012). Stress Tolerance: New
Challenges for Millennial College Students, College Student Journal, 46(2):
362-375.

Blankley, J. (2003). Mental Health Professionals Perspectives on Animal-Assisted
Therapy. (Unpublished masters thesis). College of St. Catherine & University of
St. Thomas, St. Paul, MN.
Braun, C., Stangler, T., Narveson, J. & Pettingell, S. (2009). Animal-Assisted Therapy
as a Pain Relief Intervention for Children, Complementary Therapies in Clinical
Practice, 15, 105-109.
Brodie, S. J. & Biley, F. C. (1999). An Exploration of the Potential Benefits of Pet-
Facilitated Therapy, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 8: 329-337.
Chandler, C.K. (2005). Animal Assisted Therapy in Counseling. New York: Taylor &
Francis Group.
Chang, V.Y., Palesh, O., Caldwell, R., Glasgow, N., Abramsom, M., Luskin, F., Gill, M.,
Burke, A. & Koppman, C. (2004). The effects of a mindfulness-based stress
reduction program on stress, mindfulness self-efficacy, and positive states of
mind, Stress and Health, 20: 141-147.
Charnetski, C.J., Riggers, S. & Brennan, F.X. (2004). Effect of Petting a Dog on
Immune System Function, Psychological Reports, 95: 1087-1091.
The Chronicle of Higher Education (2012). Facts and Figures. Retrieved from
http://chronicle.com/section/Almanac-of-Higher-Education/141/ 10/9/12.
Cole, K., Gawlinski, A, Steers, N. & Kotlerman, J. (2007). Animal-Assisted Therapy
with Patients Who Have Been Hospitalized with Heart Failure, Critical Care, 16,
6, 575-588.
Crawford, J.J. & Pomerinke, K.A. (2003). Therapy Pets: The Animal-human Healing
Partnership. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Cusack, O. & Smith, E. (1984). Pets and the Elderly: The Therapeutic Bond. New
York: The Haworth Press.
Dienstbier, R.A. (1989). Arousal and Physiological Toughness: Implications for
Mental and Physical Health, Psychological Review, 96(1): 84-100.
Dooley, B. (2012). No Child Left Inside, Mpls.St.Paul, 16, 6, 66-77.
Duckro, P.N., Korytnyk, N.X. & Vanderberg, B.R. (1989). The Stress-Arousal
Checklist as a Measure of Situational Stress versus Simple Arousal,
Psychological Reports, 64:239-242.
Field, K. (2006). These Student Requests are a Different Animal, Chronicle, 53(8):
A30, retrieved from http://chronicle.com 9/10/12.

Fine, A.H. (Ed.) (2006). The Handbook on Animal-Assisted Therapy: theoretical
foundations and guidelines for practice (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Friedmann, E., Katcher, A.H., Lynch, J.J., & Thomas, S.A. (1980). Animal companions
and one-year survival of patients after discharge from a coronary care unit,
Public Health Reports, 95:307312.
Friedmann, E., Katcher, A.H., Lynch, J.J., Thomas, S.A. & Messent, P.R. (1983).
Social Interaction and Blood Pressure: Influence of Animal Companions,
Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease, 171(8):461-465.
Gaterud, A. (2011). Gone to the Dogs, Star Tribune, Section E, May 5, 2011.
Giaquinto, S. & Valentini, F. (2009). Is there a scientific basis for pet therapy?
Disability and Rehabilitation, 31(7): 595-598.
Geist, T.S. (2011). Conceptual Framework for Animal Assisted Therapy, Children &
Adolescent Social Work Journal, 28:243-256.
Greenberg P., Sisitsky T., Kessler R., Finkelstein S., Berndt E., Davidson J., Ballenger J.,
Fyer A. The economic burden of anxiety disorders in the 1990s. Journal of
Clinical Psychiatry, 1999; 60(7): 42735.
Hart, L.A. (1995). The Role of Pets in Enhancing Human Well-being: Effects for Older
People. The Waltham Book of Human-Animal Interactions: Benefits and
Responsibilities. Retrieved from
http://www.deltasociety.org/Document.Doc?id=319.
Haubenhofer, D.K. & Kirchengast, S. (2007) Dog Handlers and Dogs Emotional and
Cortisol Secretion Responses Associated with Animal-Assisted Therapy
Sessions Society and Animals, 15(2): 127-150.
Havener, L., Gentes, L., Thaler, B., Megel, M.E., Baun, M.M., Driscoll, F.A., Beiraghi,
S, & Agrawal, S. (2001). The Effects of a Companion Animal on Distress in
Children Undergoing Dental Procedures, Issues in Comprehensive Pediatric
Nursing, 24(2): 137-152.
Herzog, H. (2011). The Impact of Pets on Human Health and Psychological Well-Being:
Fact, Fiction, or Hypothesis? Current Directions in Psychological Science,
20(4): 236-239.
Hoage, R.J. ed. (1989). Perceptions of Animals in American Culture. Washington, D.C.:
Smithsonian Institutional Press.
Hooker, S.D., Holbrook Freeman, L. & Stewart, P. (2002). Pet Therapy Research: A
Historical Review, Holistic Nurse Practitioner, 17(1): 17-23.

Hurtado, S. (2010). The American Freshman: National Norms Fall 2010, Higher
Education Research Institute of UCL. Retrieved from http://heri.ucla.edu/pr-
display.php?prQry=55.
Huus, K. (2012). VA wont cover costs of service dogs assigned for PTSD treatment,
NBC News.com. Retrieved from http://usnews.nbcnews.com/
_news/2012/09/06/13708645-va-wont-cover-costs-of-service-dogs-assigned-for-
ptsd-treatment?lite.
Kawamura, N., Niiyama, M., & Niiyama, H. (2007). Long-term Evaluation of Animal-
Assisted Therapy for Institutionalized Elderly People: a preliminary result,
Japanese Psychogeriatric Society, 7: 8-13.
Kerr, J. & Pratt, C. (1983). Back-to-the-Farm: Stimulating Reminiscence and Interaction
among the Institutionalized Elderly, Activities, Adaptation & Aging, 3(1): 27-35.
Kessler RC, Chiu WT, Demler O, Walters EE. (2005). Prevalence, severity, and
comorbidity of twelve-month DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity
Survey Replication (NCS-R). Archives of General Psychiatry, 62(6):617-27.
King, L.M. (2007). Animal-Assisted Therapy: a guide for professional counselors,
school counselors, social workers and educators. Bloomington, IN: Author
House.
King, M.G., Burrows, G.D., & Stanley, G.V. (1983). Measurement of stress and
arousal: Validation of the stress/arousal checklist, British Journal of
Psychology, 74(4): 473-479.
Kueser, B. (Ed.) (2013). Therapy Animals bring Stress Relief to College Campuses,
Interactions: a Publication for members of Pet Partners, 30(2): 4-5.
Kuh, G.D, Kinzie, J., Buckley, J.A., Bridges, B.K., & Hayek, J.C. (2006). What Matters
to Student Success: A Review of the Literature. Commissioned Report for the
National Symposium on Postsecondary Student Success: Spearheading a Dialog
on Student Success. National Postsecondary Education Cooperative. Retrieved
from http://nces.ed.gov/npec/pdf/kuh_team_report.pdf.
Louv, R. (2008). Last Child in the Woods: Saving our Children from Nature Deficit
Disorder. Chapel Hill, N.C.: Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill.
Mackay, C., Cox, T., Burrows, G., Lazzerini, T. (1978). An inventory for the
measurement of self-reported stress and arousal, British Journal of Social and
Clinical Psychology, 17 (3). http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-
8260.1978.tb00280.x.
MacNamara, M. & Moga, J. (2012, August). Integrating Animals in Evidence-Based
Mental Health Practice: a new model for animal-assisted therapy. Continuing
education session at the University of Minnesota.

Marcus, D.A. (2011). The Power of Wagging Tails: a Doctors Guide to Dog Therapy
and Healing. New York, NY: Demos Health.
Miller, J. (2010). Healing Companions: Ordinary Dogs and their Extraordinary Power
to Transform Lives. Pompton Plains, NJ: New Page Books, a division of Career
Press, Inc.
Misra, R & Castillo, L.G. (2004). Academic Stress Among College Students:
Comparison of American and International Students, International Journal of
Stress Management, 11(2): 132-148.
Moody, W.J., Fenwick, D.C. & Blackshaw, J.K. (1996). Pitfalls of studies designed to
test the effect pets have on the cardiovascular parameters of their owners in the
home situation: a pilot study, Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 47: 127-136.
Morrison, M.L. (2007). Health Benefits of Animal-Assisted Interventions,
Complementary Health Practice Review, 51-61.
Muschel, I.J. (1984). Pet Therapy with Terminal Cancer Patients, The Journal of
Contemporary Social Work, 451-458, retrieved from www.familiesinsociety.org.
National Center for Education Statistics (2012). Higher Education: Gaps in Access and
Persistence Study, Executive Summary. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012046/summary_6.asp.
Pedersen, D.E. (2012). Stress Carry-Over and College Student Health Outcomes,
College Student Journal, 46 (3): 620-627.
Pet Partners (2011) The Human-Animal Health Connection. What is AAA/T? Retrieved
from http://www.petpartners.org/AAA-Tinformation.
Pichot, T. & Coulter, M. (2007). Animal-Assisted Brief Therapy: a solution-focused
approach. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group.
Reed, M. & Cochrane, D. (2012). The Project on Student Debt, The Institute for College
Access & Success. Retrieved from
http://projectonstudentdebt.org/files/pub/classof2011.pdf.
Rosenzweig, S., Reibel, D.K., Greeson, J.M., Brainard, G.C., & Hojat, M. (2003).
Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction Lowers Psychological Distress In Medical
Students, Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 15 (2): 88-92. Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12708065.
Rovner, J. (2012). Pet Therapy: How Animals and Humans Heal Each Other,
NPR.org. Retrieved from
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/03/09/146583986/pet-therapy-how-
animals-and-humans-heal-each-other.

Ruiz, R. (2012). Veterans Rave about PTSD Service Dogs, but Research Lags,
NBCNews.com. Retrieved from http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/
2012/08/03/12971693-veterans-rave-about-ptsd-service-dogs-but-research-
lags?lite.
Sable, P. (1995). Pets, Attachment and Well-Being across the Life Cycle, National
Association of Social Workers, Inc. 40(3): 334-341.
Sakson, S. (2009). Paws & Effect. New York, NY: Spiegel & Grau.
Shapiro, S.L., Schwartz, G.E. & Bonner, G. (1998). Effects of mindfulness-based stress
reduction on medical and premedical students. Journal of Behavioral Medicine,
21 (6): 581-599. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9891256.
Shore, E.R., Douglas, D.K., Riley, M.L. (2005). Whats in it for the Companion
Animal? Pet Attachment and College Students Behaviors Toward Pets, Journal
of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 8 (1): 1-11.
Staats, S., Anderson, T., Wallace, H. (2008) Reasons for animal guardianship (pet
ownership) from two populations. Society and Animals, 16: 279-291.
Stanley-Hermanns, M. & Miller, J. (2002). Animal-Assisted Therapy, The American
Journal of Nursing, 102(10): 69-71+73+75-76.
Templer, D.I., Salter, C.A., Dickey, S., Baldwin, R., & Veleber, D.M. (1981) The
Construction of a Pet Attitude Scale, The Psychological Record, 31: 343-348.
http://www.donalditempler.com/assets/templer_2.pdf.
University of Minnesota (2010). About the Institutional Animal Care and Use
Committee (IACUC), IACUC. Retrieved from
http://cflegacy.research.umn.edu/iacuc/about/.
VanPelt, J. (2010). Animal-assisted therapy in hospice care. Social Work Today, (10)1,
8.
Williams, K.A., Kolar, M.M., Reger, B.E. & Pearson, J.C. (2001). Evaluation of a
Wellness-based Mindfulness Stress Reduction Intervention: A Controlled Trial.
American Journal of Health Promotion: 15 (6): 422-432. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.4278/0890-1171-15.6.422.
Wilson, C.C. & Barker, S.B. (2003). Challenges in Designing Human-animal Interaction
Research, American Behavioral Scientist, 47(16): 16-28.
Zamir, T. (2006). The Moral Basis of Animal-Assisted Therapy Society and Animals,
14(2): 179-199.

Appendix A

The Effect of a Therapy Animal on College Student Stress Level

INFORMATION AND CONSENT FORM

Introduction:
You are invited to participate in a research study investigating the relationship between a
therapy animal and college student stress level. This study is being conducted by Shelly
Bjick, a graduate student at St. Catherine University under the supervision of Katharine
Hill, a faculty member in the School of Social Work. You were selected as a possible
participant in this research because you are a student at St. Catherine University and you
elected to participate after seeing information about the study on campus. Please read
this form before you agree to be in the study. Please do not sign the form until you come
to your appointment and have the opportunity ask any questions you may have about this
research study.

Background Information:
The purpose of this study is to discover if a correlation exists between interaction with a
therapy animal and a reduction in college student stress level. Approximately 40 people
are expected to participate in this research.

Procedures:
If you decide to participate, you will be asked to make an appointment. Prior to your
appointment, this Information and Consent Form will be emailed to you. You should
read and understand the form. When you come to your appointment, you should bring
the printed form with you. Please ask the researcher any questions you may have about
the research study. The researcher will answer any questions you may have and then
clarify that you understand what you are agreeing to do. When your questions are
answered and you decide you want to participate, you will be asked to sign the form.
Should you forget your form; copies will be available for you at the time of your
appointment.

Once you have given informed consent, you will login to your email account on the
available computer to follow a link and complete a pre-questionnaire in Qualtrics
Software, which includes several demographic questions, a Pet Attitude Scale, and a
Stress Arousal Checklist. You will then be brought into the research room where you
will remain for 18 minutes. During that time you will be asked to sit quietly, stroke a
stuffed rabbit, view a rabbit in her habitat, or pet a live rabbit. If you pet the stuffed or
live rabbit, you will be asked to use antibacterial gel on your hands prior to touching the
animal. After the 18 minutes are over, you will be asked to login to your email account
again and complete a post-questionnaire in Qualtrics Software, using the Stress Arousal
Checklist.

An additional Stress Arousal Checklist will be emailed to you the following day.

It is estimate that you will spend approximately 30 minutes for this study.

Risks and Benefits of being in the study:
The study has minimal risks. First, you may be exposed to a live rabbit. If you have
allergies to a rabbit or timothy hay a type of dried timothy grass that's often used for
animal feed, you may experience runny nose or hives. Second, animals are live creatures
and their behavior is unpredictable. It is possible you may experience a nip or a scratch.
This risk is unlikely as the rabbit is a therapy rabbit and has been screened for social
behavior. In addition, the rabbit has been recently bathed and had nails trimmed. If you
hold the rabbit, she will be wearing a harness, attached to a leash and sitting within a
lapbed. The correct way of touching a rabbit will be demonstrated to you. If at any time
you feel uncomfortable, you may terminate your participation by alerting the researcher
that you wish to be finished.

The benefits to participation are possible reduction in your stress level. All four optional
settings of this research should allow a reduction in your stress level. You may also
experience a decrease in feelings of loneliness, a lower heart rate, and overall all calming
effect.

Results of this study will be used in a conversation about whether an animal interaction
event will be offered to students at St. Kates.
In the event that this research activity results in an injury, I will assist you with a band-
aid, tissues, or a referral to medical assistance. Any medical care for research-related
injuries should be paid by you or your insurance company. If you think you have
suffered a research-related injury, please let me know right away.

Compensation:
If you participate, you will receive a $5 gift card to your choice of one of two vendors.

Confidentiality:
Any information obtained in connection with this research study that can be identified
with you will be disclosed only with your permission; your results will be kept
confidential. In any written reports or publications, no one will be identified or
identifiable and only group data will be presented. No one at St. Catherine University,
other than the researcher and possibly advisor, will be aware of your individual results.
I will keep the research results in a locked file cabinet in at my home and only I, and
possibly my advisor Katharine Hill, will have access to the records while I work on this
project. I will finish analyzing the data by May 2013. I will then destroy all original
reports and identifying information that can be linked back to you.
Please note, while I am a graduate student, I am also a staff member at St. Catherine
University for Access & Success for student parents. It is possible we may have contact
after this research study as a result of my employment. Your participation in this study,
or lack thereof, will in no way affect services you will receive from me or Access &
Success.

Voluntary nature of the study:
Participation in this research study is voluntary. Your decision whether or not to
participate will not affect your future relations with St. Catherine University in any way.
If you decide to participate, you are free to stop at any time without affecting these
relationships. If you withdraw prior to the conclusion of your portion of the study, you
will no longer be considered for the drawing for the gift certificate.

Contacts and questions:
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me, Shelly Bjick, at 651-690-8696
or mjbjick@stkate.edu. You may ask questions now, or if you have any additional
questions later, the faculty advisor, Katharine Hill, at 651-962-5809 or
katharine.hill@stthomas.edu, will be happy to answer them. If you have other questions
or concerns regarding the study and would like to talk to someone other than the
researcher, you may also contact Dr. John Schmitt, Chair of the St. Catherine University
Institutional Review Board, at (651) 690-7739.

You may keep a copy of this form for your records.

Statement of Consent:
You are making a decision whether or not to participate. Your signature indicates that
you have read this information and your questions have been answered. Even after
signing this form, please know that you may withdraw from the study at any time.

I consent to participate in the study.

_______________________________________________________________________
Signature of Participant Date

_______________________________________________________________________
Signature of Researcher Date


Appendix B
Pre-test Questionnaire




Appendix C
Post-test / Follow-up Questionnaire


Appendix D
Recruitment Materials

ATTACHMENT D 1

Text for Campus Newsletter, Electronic Campus Bulletin Board (Kateway), and Faculty
to Class Invitation

Feeling Stressed? Research Subjects Needed!

Shelly Bjick, a student in the Master of Social Work program at St. Catherine University and the University of St.
Thomas, is seeking volunteers for her graduate social work research study. You will be committing no more than
30 minutes of your time and will meet in the Coeur de Catherine, room TBD.

Participants need to be a current college student, age 18 or older, any degree level.

This study will measure college student stress level before and after exposure to relaxation source. Participants
will receive a $5 gift card to their choice of one of two local vendors

For more information or to register, contact Shelly at mjbjick@stkate.edu or 651-690-8696.

ATTACHMENT D2


If you have 30 minutes to share, you may find you are feeling less stressed.

Shelly Bjick, a student in the Master of Social Work program at
St. Catherine University and the University of St. Thomas, is seeking
volunteers for her graduate social work research study. You will be
committing no more than 30 minutes of your time and will meet in the
Coeur de Catherine, room TBD.

Participants need to be a current college student, age 18 or older, any
degree level.

This study will measure college student stress level before and after
exposure to relaxation source. Participants will receive a $5 gift card to
their choice of one of two local vendors.

For more information or to register, contact
Shelly at mjbjick@stkate.edu or 651-690-8696.

ATTACHMENT D3
FACULTY INVITATION SCRIPT
Faculty will be emailed the flyer with text below (Flyer is attachment D2).

Shelly Bjick, a student in the Master of Social Work program at St. Catherine University and the
University of St. Thomas, is seeking volunteers for her graduate social work research study.
You will be committing no more than 30 minutes of your time and will meet in the Coeur de
Catherine, room TBD.


This study will measure college student stress level before and after exposure to relaxation
source. Participants will be entered to win one of four $10 Caribou gift cards.


In addition, faculty will be given the following information:
I am an MSW student at St. Catherine and St. Thomas School of Social Work. I am also
staff in St. Kates Access & Success department. I am conducting a research project for
my MSW degree and am looking for student participants. I am hoping to get
approximately 40 participants. If you are comfortable, I would appreciate your sharing
this information with your class. If you would prefer to have me personally attend your
class to extend this invitation, I am happy to do so. Let me tell you briefly about the
study.
Research will be held on the campus of St. Catherine University. It will take
approximately 30 minutes of your time.
Participation in this research is completely voluntary there will be no negative
consequences should a student decide not to participate.
Participants will be asked to:
o set an appointment and read a consent form.
o complete an online survey, which will be emailed to the participants St.
Kates email account. The survey will collect basic demographic data, as
well as questions about animals and individual stress levels.
o spend 18 minutes in the research effort, which involves exposure to a
potential stress relieving source.
o complete a second online survey upon completing their participation.
o complete a third online survey approximately 24 hours after participation.
If a student is interested in participation or has questions, please contact Shelly
Bjick at mjbjick@stkate.edu or 651-690-8696.
Participants will receive a $5 gift card to their choice of one of two local vendors. If you
have any class policy to encourage participation, such as extra credit points, please let me
know, as well as if you would need anything from me notifying you of participation.
This would need to be communicated with the student prior to their participation.
Do you have any questions? If so, please contact me. I appreciate your consideration
and support!

ATTACHMENT D4

PERSONAL INVITATION SCRIPT
Students will be handed the flyer with text below (Flyer is attachment D2).

Shelly Bjick, a student in the Master of Social Work program at St. Catherine University and the
University of St. Thomas, is seeking volunteers for her graduate social work research study.
You will be committing no more than 30 minutes of your time and will meet in the Coeur de
Catherine, room TBD.


This study will measure college student stress level before and after exposure to relaxation
source. Participants will be entered to win one of four $10 Caribou gift cards.

In addition, students will be given the following information:
Research will be held on the campus of St. Catherine University. It will take
approximately 30 minutes of your time.
Participation in this research is completely voluntary there will be no negative
consequences should a student decide not to participate.
Participants will be asked to:
o set an appointment and read a consent form.
o complete an online survey, which will be emailed to the participants St.
Kates email account. The survey will collect basic demographic data, as
well as questions about animals and individual stress levels.
o spend 18 minutes in the research effort, which involves exposure to a
potential stress relieving source.
o complete a second online survey upon completing their participation.
o complete a third online survey approximately 24 hours after participation.
If you are interested in participation or have questions, please contact Shelly Bjick
at mjbjick@stkate.edu or 651-690-8696.

The Effects of A Therapy Animal On College Student Stress and Aro

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

The Effects of A Therapy Animal On College Student Stress and Aro

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

St.

Anda mungkin juga menyukai